Building Urban Resilience Through Smart City Planning: A Systematic Literature Review

Highlights

What are the main findings?

• Inclusiveness, stakeholder collaboration, sustainability, governance, and public satisfaction are crucial to achieving resilience in smart cities.
• Strategic planning and integrated urban systems, requiring interdisciplinary work and public engagement are essential for fostering urban resilience.

What are the implications of the main findings?

• Research and practice should acknowledge the need to improve the design and implementation of smart and resilient city concepts.
• Urban planners should integrate resilience into policymaking in developing smart and resilient cities.

Abstract

Smart city planning is crucial for enhancing urban resilience, especially with the contemporary challenges of rising urban population and climate change. This study conducts a systematic literature review (SLR) to examine the integration of urban resilience in smart city planning, synthesizing the current literature to identify key components, barriers, and enablers. The study found that technological integration, sustainability measures, and citizens’ participation are critical factors to the effective development of smart cities. The review emphasizes the need for an integrated approach to urban resilience, calling for continued research and collaboration among stakeholders. It highlights how urban sustainability and resilience should be addressed within an urban system and that interdisciplinary work, stakeholder consultation, and public engagement are required. It finally suggests the integration of creativity and diversity in urban planning practices and policies for improving vulnerability to modern-day challenges in urban contexts. It concludes by outlining implications for urban planning practices and policy development, advocating for innovative, inclusive strategies to enhance urban resilience.

1. Introduction

Smart city development is crucial to building urban resilience, defined as the capacity of urban areas to prevent, mitigate, adapt to, and bounce back from natural, economic, and social disturbances [1] and continues to function effectively [2]. Smart cities foster urban resilience by addressing the challenges of providing and managing urban infrastructure [3]. This is especially so as cities worldwide are faced with the daunting urbanization and climate change challenges and socioeconomic vulnerabilities [4,5].

Smart city planning deploys technology and big data to better enhance urban management and service delivery to solve urban challenges [6] and create urban resilience [7], including the capacity to make adjustments in times of vulnerabilities, such as “teleworking” from home during the COVID-19 pandemic when lockdowns and social distancing disrupted the ability of workers to commute from home to work [8,9]. Improving urban housing and managing urban density are other resilience policies [10,11]. Thus, the COVID-19 crisis exposed weaknesses in urban systems and underlined the necessity of integrating resilience principles in urban areas [12,13,14].

In the post-pandemic era, smart technologies and digital tools can facilitate urban resilience, planning and management decision-making, remote jobs, and the provision of essential services such as public health and education [15,16,17]. Thus, the pandemic experience is vital in developing smart and resilient cities.

Although smart city initiatives concern identifying technologies and solutions for building urban resilience, new tools are necessary to effectively detect and combat growing threats [18]. For example, data protection and cybersecurity are major challenges to smart city planning and urban resilience [19]. Also, some smart solutions are likely to lead to “tech divides,” when these technologies serve few citizens while deepening social inequalities [20]. Lack of access to technology or digital skills can also marginalize vulnerable people from fully benefitting from city smartness and jeopardizing overall resilience [4]. Moreover, these technologies have significant environmental impacts through their high use of energy and resources [21,22,23].

Other issues are smart cities focusing more on technologies with little involvement of citizens, inadequate governance and coordination among actors in the system, such as government and non-governmental agencies, and firms [24]. Lack of convergence of efforts and sharing of information and assets among stakeholders have been identified as challenges to building resilience [25,26].

The literature indicates a dearth of studies on evaluating the impact of smart city initiatives on the resilience of cities, smart city initiatives and changes required to enhance urban resilience, or the success factors and obstacles to the implementation of smart city projects [27,28,29,30]. There is more to smart city solutions and plans than technology and innovation, as appropriate policies and governance systems are essential in managing and coordinating various actors and strategies involved in smart city development to enhance urban resilience. The combination of the concepts of urban resilience and smart city has important implications for urban planning, including the mitigation of the negative impacts of increasing technology deployment and the integration of resilience and sustainability into urban fabric [6,31,32].

Despite the expansive literature on urban resilience and smart city development, the knowledge gap yet to be bridged is how resilience and smart city frameworks can be successfully implemented and practiced in an integrated manner. Most of the research work targets resilience or smart city strategies individually while rarely attempting to understand how the two are related and how each may bolster the other. The present literature review aims to systematically assess the extant literature to determine the essential components, drivers, and challenges for urban resilience in smart cities.

The research questions guiding this systematic review are (a) Can cities become more resilient while pursuing smart city planning? and (b) What are the challenges and opportunities for the synergy between smart city planning and urban resilience? These research questions aim at understanding the existing research gaps regarding the relationship between urban resilience and smart city development to explore what works and identify enablers and barriers. This article is unique in its systematic analysis of the twin premises of technology and geopolitics within smart, resilient cities. It expands the body of knowledge by providing directions for smart city planning, strategies that can enhance urban resilience, and the potential of smart city solutions for improving the readiness of future cities from a risk management perspective.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Urban Resilience and Smart City Planning in the Context of Sustainable Urban Development

Urban resilience and smart city development are vital components of contemporary city-making, especially in view of challenges such as climate change, rapid urbanization, and socioeconomic transformations. Urban resilience is the ability of urban areas to withstand and bounce back from environmental and socioeconomic shocks and stresses, which is closely connected to the concept of urban sustainability [3]. Resilient cities refer to cities that do not break down when disturbances occur and quickly recover to their state of functionality [33]. These definitions encompass several key concepts: adaptability: the ability of an urban system to change its state in response to various influences and undo the negative effects of a disruption [34]; robustness: the ability to continue to perform at a normal rate and maintain the ability to operate even after an abrupt change [35]; redundancy: the existence of multiple routes and assets to support vital operations [36]; flexibility: the adaptability to new circumstances, as the ability to transform state and actions, according to the context of the new problem [37]; inclusivity: implementing resilience-building initiatives to capture all the facets of the urban populace [3]. According to Sharifi and Yamagata [38], resilience can help develop smart city planning frameworks to make urban environments intelligent and resistant to various adversities.

On the other hand, a smart city connotes a city that uses information and communication technology (ICT), including big data and AI, to improve the efficiency of services in the city while using resources sustainably and efficiently as well as improving its interactions with the citizens [30]. Key characteristics of smart cities include the following: technology integration: ubiquitous integration of ICT in urban structures and facilities [39]; data-driven decision-making: incorporating big data technologies to support and guide the planning and development of urban environments [40]; connectivity: the wireless means of communication facilitate the effective and efficient transfer of information in real time [41]; sustainability: concentration on the usage of environmental protection activities and resource conservation [42]; a citizen-centric approach, which includes the focus on the quality of life and active participation of citizens in the management of the city [43].

Smart city planning implements advanced technologies in developing and managing cities, optimizing service delivery, and minimizing resource use [44,45], while enhancing human quality of life and urban resilience and sustainability [46]. Thus, the integration of “urban resilience” and “smart city” can promote social inclusion and environmental management to enhance the capability of urban centers to address present and future challenges [1].

Some distinct virtues of smart city planning in creating urban resilience include better systems, data management, real-time communication, and resource utilization [23]. Because smart city planning varies based on its emphasis on tech, politics, or people, proper adoption of such technologies calls for substantive understanding of human systems in cities and long term planning that includes adequate resilience and innovation [40]. Sharifi et al. [9] suggest that the concept cannot be conceived as a product but rather as a process, as it is driven by social, economic, and environmental factors.

The above drivers underscore the importance of a holistic view and approach to planning smart cities that incorporate resilience principles to prepare them for the multiple opportunities and challenges the future has in store [3]. Therefore, the present study adopts the following definition of urban resilience in the context of smart city planning: Smart urban resilience is the ability of an urban system to continue to restore its key functions following shocks or stresses affecting a city and its people, while incorporating ICT and sustainable development [6]. This definition, derived from various scholarly perspectives, encompasses the strategic and operational dimensions required to develop and improve urban resilience.

There are several theories that link urban resilience with the smart city concept, suggesting that technologies alone cannot achieve resilience without a comprehensive approach [20,47]. The present article proposes a multidimensional framework for urban resilience in smart cities (Figure 1), integrating advanced threat management technologies with urban planning strategies.

This framework applies smart technologies and data-driven governance to achieve urban resilience. It outlines specific aspects of public safety, operations during disasters, rebuilding infrastructure, and managing crises, with an emphasis on the interconnection of these components within the context of governance, technologies, and finance. Although existing frameworks focus on stakeholders, this framework includes more detail on the technological and governing structures that underpin urban resilience and provides a clear sequential model of the resilience process.

The Threat Management Cycle within the figure highlights the four critical steps for smart, resilient cities that organizations follow in the event of a cyber-attack: using analytics to predict threats (Sense) and strengthen the vulnerable aspects in urban systems and infrastructure (Defend), cities can prevent and tackle possible crises. The (Respond) step establishes systems for crisis management, while (Recover) identifies and sustains the organizational assets during a crisis and afterwards to ensure a continuous provision of essential services [49,50].

The complex framework illustrated in Figure 1 reflects the need to develop sustainable or “fit cities”, which are socially just, economically prosperous, environmentally sound, and capable of managing the current and future urbanization challenges [22,46]. Such resilient smart cities are not only technologically driven but are also sustainable, capable of tackling both short term and long term environmental and socioeconomic challenges and improving people’s well-being [39].

2.2. Methodology of the Review

This study employs a systematic literature review (SLR) as a methodological approach to examine how technology can be used to increase urban resilience, including governance, community engagement, and stakeholder participation. The review protocol is based on the general guidelines outlined by Kitchenham and Charters [51] and adheres to the standards set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [52]. To obtain international, peer-reviewed articles and books covering urban studies, environmental science, and technology, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science academic databases were chosen for their extensive coverage of research related to urban resilience and smart city planning. The primary search terms, shown in

Table 1. Keywords and search terms.

Keywords	Search Terms
Smart city planning and urban resilience	“smart city” OR “smart city planning” AND “urban resilience” OR “city resilience”
Emerging technologies	“artificial intelligence” OR “Internet of Things” “IoT” OR “AI” OR “big data”
Community engagement	“stakeholder involvement” OR “community”

, included “smart city planning” AND “urban resilience”, “IoT” OR “AI” OR “big data”, and “stakeholder involvement” OR “community.” These keywords were chosen to include any studies that dealt with the integration of urban resilience with smart city concepts and theories, as well as implementation studies, providing a non-narrowed and highly relevant search output.

The inclusion criteria are that a document must be a peer-reviewed article or book published in the last two decades to guarantee that only relevant materials covering recent trends and developments in the study of urban resilience and smart city planning are included. Peer-reviewed articles involving practical examples or case studies of technology implementation in resilience are also included. Both quantitative and qualitative studies are included to ensure that all aspects of urban resilience are covered. Papers addressing policy considerations are also included because they explain how improvement of urban resilience is possible regarding governmental and legislative environments.

The exclusion criteria are that studies irrelevant to urban resilience or smart city planning and are not peer-reviewed articles and books are not included. Also, studies that are non-empirical, opinion pieces, or editorials, or those limited to generic or conventional urban planning without integrating technology, are not included since this review seeks to understand the role of technology in framing urban resilience. Other excluded articles are those that do not engage community or stakeholders, because their views are vital to building urban resilience. Papers with a theoretical basis but without empirical substantiation are excluded because they may not contain practical information that is required for the research. Lastly, research works that do not relate to policy frameworks are left out since understanding policies is a key to improving urban resilience. The criteria for inclusion and exclusion of articles are detailed in

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Inclusion criteria: peer-reviewed articles and books published in the last two decades; studies focusing on urban resilience and smart city planning; empirical studies or case studies; articles discussing the integration of technology in urban resilience; research that includes community engagement and stakeholder involvement; publications that provide quantitative or qualitative data; studies that discuss policy implications for enhancing urban resilience.

Exclusion criteria: non-peer-reviewed articles; articles not related to urban resilience or smart city planning; opinion pieces, editorials, or non-empirical studies; studies focusing solely on traditional urban planning without technology; articles that do not consider community or stakeholder perspectives; theoretical papers without empirical evidence; literature that does not address policy frameworks.

.

The review includes the planning stage, which is the design of the research plan for conducting the systematic review based on this study’s research questions mentioned previously. It involves choosing key terms for literature search (Table 1) and inclusion/exclusion criteria mentioned in Table 2. The second stage pertains to literature search for articles to include in the paper. The search was initially conducted for the articles containing the keywords, with no restricted date of publication. The author formulated a query string that joined keywords associated with smartness, sustainability, and urban environments, resulting in retrieving 1587 articles. Duplicated articles (568) were removed from the list, and another 105 articles were removed using the exclusion criteria. The abstracts of the remaining number of articles (242) were crosschecked against the inclusion and exclusion criteria in Table 2. As a result, 172 articles were eliminated, and only 70 articles made the final list (Appendix A), which underwent qualitative meta-synthesis, focused on the research question. To ensure a transparent and replicable process, the study selection was conducted independently by two reviewers. Discrepancies in study selection were solved through discussion, and in cases where disagreements persisted, a third reviewer was consulted.

The final stage was reporting and dissemination, in which the information drawn from the selected literature was organized and coherently written in a structured format. This a priori technique of classifying articles was completed with the help of qualitative methods of pattern matching and explanation building [53], which enabled the analysis of trends and gaps in the literature and thereby enhanced understanding of smart cities and sustainable cities. The outcomes were then written in the form of a literature review paper. Other important related items of literature that may not have been included in the database search were also included in this stage to discuss and strengthen the findings (Figure 2).

The data extraction process was significant in the synthesis of the selected studies’ findings. The essential information was obtained using a data extraction form that was developed to minimize variability in information collection. The following data points were extracted from each study: author(s) and publication year, study objectives and research questions, theoretical frameworks and approaches employed, key findings related to urban resilience and smart city planning, identified barriers and enablers of integrating resilience into smart city initiatives, and suggested future research directions.

After that, data extraction proceeded onto the next step, which was evaluating and integrating the literature reviewed. A data coding strategy was used to compare reviewed studies and discover key thematic patterns, including key components of urban resilience in smart city planning, integration of resilience in smart city planning, technological challenges and barriers in enhancing urban resilience, and enablers of successful urban resilience in smart city planning. Findings from the reviewed studies were then combined and synthesized through a content and narrative synthesis approaches, which helped to gain a situational perspective of the findings and aided the assessment of the literature for the voids. Meta-analysis of the included studies was not possible, and other quantitative synthesis approaches were considered unsuitable since the studies were heterogeneous and hardly contained quantitative data that could be pooled. The findings of the analysis were then structured into a logical pattern of literary contributions on urban resilience and the planning of smart cities and future research directions for advancing the field.

3. Results: Identified Themes and Implications

There is a noteworthy shift in smart cities and urban resilience discourse. Initially, smart cities were broadly conceptualized as the application of ICT to improve the operations of cities and the efficient delivery of public services, such as transportation, energy use, water supply, and public security [29,46]. However, as the smart city idea advanced, there was a shift as more researchers acknowledged the social, economic, and environmental context and integration of technological solutions [3,23]. Such a change stems from understanding the need to move beyond a strict technical and technological perspective on urban development to multifaceted challenges of smart cities and citizen involvement.

Urban resilience has also received increasing interest as the capacity to manage and recover from volatile shocks and chronic strains. Resilience thinking stresses the protracted and sequential character of urban systems and processes and the consequent requirement for integral strategies that can cope with continual, sporadic, and unpredictable adversities [3,54]. The scientific community and practitioners have started appreciating that smart city technologies and strategies can be utilized to strengthen the resilience of the city, whereas concepts of resilience may help improve the effectiveness of smart city approaches [55,56]. Thus, the integration of the smart city and resilience brings up several issues and challenges, such as how rapid urbanization impacts both concepts [57,58,59,60].

The literature indicates such issues as conceptual confusion, methodological problems, and realistic implementation of smart city solutions, and the trade-off between the short term optimization of resource utilization, which is typical for most smart city initiatives, and the long term ability to adapt, which is the focus of the resilience perspective [61]. It is also evident that simple solutionists’ approaches are insufficient to address the complexity of urban problems in the 21st century [62,63,64,65].

For example, Samarakkody et al. [66] found that innovative technologies enhance the ability of cities to cope with disasters, while Ateş and Erinsel Önder [67] emphasized the role of localized smart city applications in addressing environmental conditions to create resilience. According to Okonta and Vukovic [68], software applications are critical in efficient resource allocation to enhance urban sustainability and resilience. Smart mobility solutions foster resilience-seeking in emergent economies by improving transport efficiency [69], while innovative city features positively influence labor market resilience in the post-transition economy [70].

Similarly, social media enhances smart cities’ community interest and capability [71]. In their study, Kutty et al. [72] developed a fuzzy expert-based model to assess sustainability, resilience, and livability indices in European smart cities. Gkontzis et al. [73] found that data analytics and digital twins can improve resilience at the neighborhood scale. Almaleh [74] developed some approaches for evaluating the resilience level of smart infrastructures. In addition, Chiroli et al. [75] suggested incorporating resilience and sustainability into the indicator framework for resilient cities. These studies emphasize the need to strengthen urban adaptive capacities and employ more coordinated and comprehensive development approaches in urban policy that can link the smart city and resilience frameworks.

3.1. Key Components of Urban Resilience in Smart City Planning

Urban resilience is one of the most important paradigms within the smart city development framework. This section discusses three key components of urban resilience in smart city planning, which are summarized in

Table 3. Summary of key components of urban resilience in smart city planning.

Components	Description	Implications
Role of information and communication technology (ICT)	ICT allows cities to gather, process, and utilize data through smart sensors and communication structures. Technologies such as IoT, big data analytics, and AI all play key roles.	Enhances real-time monitoring, decision-making and interaction among city personnel, emergency services, and residents. Improves resilience through efficient data management.
Sustainability and adaptability	Focuses on environmental management, sustainable resource use, and renewable energy development. Includes green infrastructure such as parks and green roofs.	Supports climate change mitigation, increases energy security, and enhances urban adaptability. Promotes using renewable energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Involvement of the citizen	Engages residents in resilience planning through participatory methods, crowdsourcing, and digital platforms. Enhances social capital and cooperation during emergencies.	Improves resilience strategies by incorporating local knowledge and fostering community support. Strengthens social bonds and enhances cooperation in crisis situations.

: the role of information and communication technology, sustainability and adaptability, and citizens’ relations and involvement.

3.1.1. The Role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT)

The ICT plays an important function in integrating resilience strategies into urban environments by providing the ability to capture, process, and apply data to continuously monitor urban systems and deliver services. For instance, ICT facilitates communication and decision-making between city officials and inhabitants, which is crucial for emergency preparedness and building resilience capacity [76]. Some of the technologies that assist in developing the cities’ resilience include the Internet of Things (IoT) and big data and analytics, as well as artificial intelligence (AI).

The Internet of Things: IoT applications include smart meters and environmental sensors that gather information and real-time statistics to monitor urban infrastructures and the environment. For example, smart water management systems may detect leakage and reduce water loss for more efficient water resource management [33]. Smart sensors can help monitor air quality, traffic control, and energy consumption [9].

Big data analytics: cities use big data to easily identify scenarios required for developing resilience solutions. For example, data from social networks combined with satellite images can help build risk-management models that point to sources of danger and offer recommendations for preventive measures [1].

Artificial Intelligence: machine learning can parse large amounts of data to optimize services in cities and aid decision-making. For instance, AI can maximize the flow of traffic and avoid traffic congestion, enhancing resilience and the overall robustness of cities [77].

3.1.2. Sustainability and Adaptability

Sustainability and adaptability are crucial for environmental management, optimal resource utilization, and the development of renewable energy resources to assist cities in minimizing climate change impacts. Green infrastructure such as parks and green roofs improves oxygen supply while promoting the entire ecosystem [78]. Cities that deploy renewables such as solar and wind power decrease their fossil fuel consumption and enhance energy security while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating climate change [33]. Some strategies for adapting to climate change and fostering urban sustainability are:

Climate-resilient infrastructure: designing and building structures to withstand disasters such as floods and constructing systems that reduce erosion can enhance the various levels of resilience in urban centers. However, the funding aspects of these structures should be guaranteed [1].

Ecosystem-based approaches: building up resilience in natural systems by restoring wetlands and coastal ecosystems is a promising approach that can assist in preventing storm/flood catastrophes while enhancing the diversity [78].

Flexible urban planning: depending on current events, urban plans should have the flexibility needed so that they can be altered when needed. This involves simulating how the system would react during emergencies to prepare and seek remedies [9].

3.1.3. Public Relations and Involvement

Public participation in urban resilience will assist in identifying and developing effective strategies and fostering ownership by supporting resilience-enhancing initiatives. By involving residents, a city can tap into solutions and ideas that are peculiar to the region, hence allowing the development of sound resilience strategies [76]. Citizens can work together to help one another during stress or emergencies, thereby enhancing social capital and strengthening societal relations [1]. Several tools and methods can facilitate citizen engagement in resilience planning:

Participatory planning: through planning workshops and other organized community meetings, residents can put forward their own problems and participate in resilience planning processes. These platforms allow discussions, interactions, and communication between city authorities and the public [1].

Crowdsourcing: crowdsourcing is a strategy of obtaining information using community wisdom. For example, through citizen science, people engage in documenting various aspects of the environment toward building resilience [79].

Digital engagement platforms: the interaction with the citizens can be completed via social media and forums that are available online, allowing cities to share information, receive public opinions, and initiate discussions on resilience-related topics.

3.2. Integrating Resilience into Smart City Planning

The integration of urban resilience within smart city planning helps in developing sustainable cities capable of coping with multiple shocks and stresses. This novel area is, however, facing many challenges, as presented in

Table 4. Summary of challenges related to resilience integration in smart city planning.

Challenges	Description	Implications
Lack of clear definitions	The term “smart city” lacks a universally accepted definition, causing confusion among stakeholders and a lack of shared understanding of the resilience concept.	Misaligned expectations and strategies among stakeholders, leading to inefficient resilience planning. Difficulty in operationalization and measurement.
Siloed approaches and fragmented governance	There is a disconnect between smart city and resilience planning. Governance structures are often fragmented, complicating the integration of resilience strategies.	Difficulties in coordinating and implementing comprehensive resilience measures. Missed opportunities for synergies.
Social inequities	Differences in technology access and infrastructure can hinder resilience efforts across various urban areas.	Unequal resilience outcomes and increased vulnerability in less technologically advanced areas.
Short term vs. long term focus	There is tension between immediate efficiency gains and long term adaptive capacity.	Need to balance competing priorities.
Technology-centric vs. holistic view	Technological solutions are overemphasized at the expense of social factors.	Risk of exacerbating vulnerabilities.
Data management challenges and scale mismatch	Effective data management is crucial for resilience planning, but many cities struggle with data integration and analysis. There is a mismatch between the scales of smart city interventions and resilience challenges.	Inaccurate or incomplete data leading to poorly informed decision-making and ineffective resilience planning. Need for multi-scalar approaches.

.

One of the major challenges is that the concept of “resilience”, is not well defined and operationalized, with several definitions that vary between different disciplines [54]. In urban studies, for example, resilience can be engineering resilience (the capacity of a system to regain equilibrium after a disturbance), ecological resilience (the system’s capability to continue to perform its functions when shocked), and socio-ecological resilience (the capacity to adapt and transform when facing change) [80,81]. It is obvious that such conceptual diversity, although beneficial, results in confusion and inconsistent application.

Meerow et al. [3] observe that despite the flexibility of the term, the term’s use is both advantageous and disadvantageous. The absence of a standard definition hampers the identification of performance measures and benchmarks for measuring and improving the smart resilience of cities. Because of this rather vague concept, resilience can become instrumentalized or misused in urban planning, and it can perpetuate power relations in the name of building resilience or justify possible negative interventions [22,82].

Another issue is that smart city and resilience planning are often carried out in different sectors in urban governance structures (Siloed approaches) where smart city technologies are managed by IT departments while resilience strategies may fall under the environmental or emergency preparation divisions [3,40]. Emergency management is also one of the key areas of improving resilience in smart cities by integrating innovative technologies, including IoT, AI, and big data. For example, applications of IoT sensors placed on urban infrastructures can allow for checking climate parameters such as humidity, temperature, and groundwater levels within flood zones to detect risks and reduce possible emergencies [1]. These capabilities are complemented by AI-driven predictive analysis that provides the ability to forecast scenarios and allocate resources in cities under extreme weather conditions [83].

Resilient and smart cities are not only characterized by preparedness and risk mitigation measures but also by how well they respond to emergencies. A city’s emergency management system (EMS) involves improvements in emergency-related capabilities and investment in risk assessment and detection [84,85]. An example is the application of AI and robotics to enhance predictive capabilities for emergency responses [77]. Furthermore, human networking and capacity building toward community engagement is a top priority, because technology and data are best used in early warning and real-time assessment tools, but the process of helping needy people is only possible through human actions [86]. Therefore, human action combined with cutting-edge technologies can help strengthen an emergency management framework that leads to the establishment of more resilient cities.

Also, smart city platforms enhance the management of crisis communication. Linked maps and real-time interface solutions can help authorities align actions across departments, whereas applications bring targeted notifications, escape routes, and guidance into people’s homes [87]. Smart traffic management systems allow emergency vehicles to pass through the roads without hindrance, improving response time and saving lives [67]. However, there are risks related to cybersecurity, unequal availability of emergency technologies, and disjointed governance structures. Solving these problems will demand fair and equitable planning, active community participation, and sound cooperation among agencies [68].

Smart city projects can integrate inclusiveness and technology into emergency management to promote urban resilience and build synergies between both approaches [69]. For instance, smart city technologies, including IoT sensor networks and big data analytics platforms, feed valuable real-time data into resilience planning and emergency preparedness [88,89,90]. Thus, resilience principles contribute to developing stronger and less vulnerable smart city frameworks.

However, institutional barriers such as poor interdepartmental coordination and compartmentalizing smart city and the resilience plans, which mirror general issues of urban decision-making, are not easily surmountable [28]. Also, disparities in access to ICT among communities lead to social inequities. Technological advancements translate into significant chances of improving urban systems [71]. Still, technological solutions are likely to worsen existing disparities if they are not integrated into resilience planning [70]. Resilience also requires working across organizational structures where stakeholders are equipped with resources to make urban societies cope with, recover from, and avoid disruptions.

Some trends under the smart city concept can amplify social cleavages. For example, the digital divide in using new technologies and slow internet connections prevents minorities from utilizing smart city technologies [72]. Low-income populations, for instance, cannot afford smart infrastructures required to help them develop resilience in areas such as early warnings or real-time transport information [73]. Because such exclusion erodes the resilience framework that protects citizens, smart city frameworks should be inclusive, including the provision of affordable essential communications devices such as smartphones and internet services to deprived areas [74]. Elements of participatory governance for marginalized groups should include the actual involvement of these groups in decision-making processes to incorporate their identified risks and concerns into resilience planning [75]. For instance, urban interventions with community solutions for energy security in micro-grids or community-based flood warning systems place the voiceless at the center of a society that ultimately benefits from increased urban resilience.

In addition, policy intervention requires a framework of checks and balances that allows for a fair share or distribution of resources and benefits within a smart city [75]. Project evaluations should be based on equity-focused measures such as resilience outcomes in low-income areas [91]. Incorporating equity and inclusivity into the heart of city resilience ensures the development of multifaceted interventions that address challenges and reduce socioeconomic inequalities while strengthening the fabric of urban society [92].

It is prudent to invest in policies and strategies that go beyond early detection, emergency management, and early response and focus on social inequality issues related to city planning and management and quality of life. Poor families have less access to pleasant scenery and clean and spacious public spaces as compared to those who live in more affluent neighborhoods [93]. Aside from having robust emergency management systems and other preventive mechanisms, it is also important to have healthier urban environments that foster social connections during crises [94,95]. For example, the long term impact of the pandemic underscores the impetus of reducing social inequality, which exacerbates disparities in access to goods and services such as public spaces such as gardens and plazas where people needed to meet and connect socially and improve their physical and mental health [96,97].

One of the central challenges and mismatches of resilience thinking in the context of smart cities is the temporal differences they are based on. Many smart city projects prioritize short term benefits and easily achievable objectives such as decreasing traffic jams, improving service efficacy, or reducing energy consumption [98,99]. Some projects correspond to political cycles and the urgency of achieving specific outcomes to convince the stakeholders, while constructing a resilient urban infrastructure can often entail longer time horizons for results to show, as it involves the process of improving the general, long term strengths of adaptability within communities and systems at hand and overcoming various, potentially unquantifiable challenges [3,54].

This long term orientation can be quite hard to align with the need for quick outcomes in smart city initiatives. It is, however, less about the integration of smart city and resilience strategies and more about the strategic trade-off between short term and long term agendas that has general relevance but takes on added importance where both smart city and resilience approaches are perceived as having the potential to revolutionize urban futures. Planning for resilience means finding the right level of investment for the short- and long term improvement of urban services and designing planning approaches that are sensitive to short term requirements as well as long term needs.

The tension between technology-centric and holistic views was evident when a core feature of many early smart city initiatives was techno-determinism, and the primary stress was on how ICTs can be used to improve systems and services in cities [40,46]. This technical advancement has brought many benefits in terms of organizational performance and quantitative rationality but has been criticized largely for the lack of consideration of many social, cultural, and ecological aspects of urban existence. By contrast, resilience thinking proposes that there is a need to understand the city’s system as a unified whole with consideration given to social, ecological, and technological structures [3,80]. This perspective considers that the risks and resilience of cities arise from infrastructure and technology, social networks, institutional frameworks, and ecology. The emphasis here is on how to conceive smart city strategies that will take advantage of emergent technologies without overlooking the social-ecological conditions that underpin urban sustainability.

3.3. Technological Challenges and Barriers in Enhancing Urban Resilience

Although smart technologies can enhance urban resilience, they are constrained by several barriers, including data quality and integration issues, cybersecurity threats, the digital divide, the complexity and nature of the systems, and technology lock-in [40].

The quality of data and its integration is a core challenge of deploying smart technologies for urban resilience. While smart city projects produce large amounts of information from networks and systems of sensors, social media, and official records, which are often fragmented, inconsistent, and of varying quality, making it difficult to gain a holistic picture of the urban systems, structures, and their weaknesses [40]. Lack of data continuity and/or wrong data can hamper risk evaluations and decrease resilience [54]. Moreover, the compilation of data from multiple sources, despite the use of geographic information system (GIS) technologies, is still a technical and organizational challenge given that there is little integration between different data held in organizational silos [28]. As such, it is essential to ensure data integration, use platforms to combat data silos, encourage data-sharing practices among actors, and develop a mutually understandable language [56].

Another challenge is cybersecurity risk, intensified by dependency on mutually connected smart systems, which can jeopardize critical services such as electricity, water supply, or transport [56]. Data breaches also threaten privacy while leading to distrust, and conversely, those with ill intent can use these systems to foment risks or future social disturbances. Integration also becomes another risk where failure in one segment of a smart city can affect other segments. For effective risk management, it requires sound security measures, scanning for risks and threats, and partnership among government entities, businesses, and cybersecurity personnel [46]. System complexity adds another layer to the smart urban resilience enhancement process, which makes it quite challenging. The use of varied technologies as well as interrelated sensors complicates the systems in cities, hence producing numerous connections and relations [100]. This can make the nature of relationships involved hard to discern, create new sources of unpredictability, and swamp conventional approaches to decision-making.

Furthermore, the systems under study are highly interdependent, and an event happening in one system can cause a ripple effect in other systems. To address this challenge, it requires using quantitative and qualitative modelling and simulation tools, as well as systems thinking and adaptive management approaches to address the complexity of assimilating dynamic patterns and outcomes from the city [28]. The third threat to future resilience of urban areas relates to what has been called technology lock-in. First decisions regarding technology lock in the system and limit the ability to maneuver in response to contingencies [61]. These may result in lowered adaptive capability, susceptibility to becoming old technology, and reliance on closed systems. Some proven strategies to avoid technology lock-in include the use of open standards, modularity, and supporting ecosystems to be able to adapt to new technologies [61].

3.4. Enablers of Successful Urban Resilience in Smart City Planning

There is a need to incorporate the aspect of resilience into smart city planning to enhance the implementation of environment-endurable urban structures. Enablers of successful urban resilience in smart city planning are presented below and summarized in

Table 5. Enablers of successful urban resilience in smart city planning.

Enablers Frameworks	Description	Implications
Integrated urban planning policies	Policies that promote integration across various sectors can enhance resilience in urban settings.	Improved coordination and efficiency in resilience initiatives, leading to more cohesive urban strategies.
Funding and investment strategies	Clear frameworks for funding and investment are essential to support resilient initiatives.	Increased financial support for resilience projects, facilitating the implementation and sustainability of strategies.
Regulatory frameworks	Establishing regulations that encourage innovation while ensuring safety and security is critical.	A balanced approach to fostering innovation while protecting public safety and infrastructure integrity.
Public-private partnerships	Collaborations between public entities and private sectors can leverage resources and expertise for resilience.	Enhanced resource allocation and expertise sharing, leading to more effective and innovative resilience solutions.
Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms	Effective mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating resilience strategies can help cities adapt and improve over time.	Continuous improvement of resilience strategies through data-driven insights and feedback.
Capacity building and education	Training city planners and stakeholders in urban resilience is essential for developing effective strategies to address complex urban challenges.	Increased competency and preparedness in urban planning, leading to more robust and adaptive resilience strategies.

.

Appropriate policies are crucial for incorporating urban resilience into smart city strategies and solutions. Defragmenting governance structures and reconciling various stakeholders’ interests vis-à-vis the multifaceted issues of urban resiliencies is crucial because various urban resilience challenges are interrelated and therefore require integrated planning approaches. More conventional isolated approaches are insufficient for addressing multi-faceted issues related to resilience in smart city scenarios [3,55]. Synchronized planning entails establishing large-scale multidisciplinary teams, single-city data systems, and holistic strategies that tie smart urbanism to wider city-making endeavors. An exemplary approach is the City Resilience Framework by ARUP and the Rockefeller Foundation, which superimposes four key aspects, including public health [101,102].

Integrated planning is not without its challenges. For instance, institutional rigidities and divergent self-interests are common, and political leadership and methods of building human and institutional capacities across sectors are required for integrated planning to succeed. This concept is essential for organizing the complexity and dynamics of urban resilience challenges and presupposes open institutional frameworks to modify the strategies based on new information and emerging conditions [54]. Such elements include time-based planning and review, using some assumptions, funds that can be easily reallocated, and the culture of experimentation. The 100 Resilient Cities practice of adaptive governance works through the selection of the practice’s chief resilience officers and cross-ministry of resilience units [3]. The operationalization of adaptive governance is not without its difficulties, including resistance to change and the question of how to maintain accountability while remaining adaptable. The issues arising would be of capacity and the introduction of new performance indicators to measure resilience interventions.

The involvement of stakeholders in the assessment of resilience strategies is crucial in building effective solutions. Governmental, corporate, academic, and civil-society organizations are helpful in mobilizing the community and engaging in the planning processes, providing feedback, and partnering with diverse stakeholders because each possesses its viewpoints and assets when it comes to resilience planning [40,46]. For example, Barcelona’s smart city strategy is one of the best examples of stakeholder-oriented approaches as it integrates the active involvement of citizens and technological independence [103].

Power dynamics and active involvement of disadvantaged individuals or groups are other enablers of urban resilience. The engagement processes and mechanisms must be constructed in ways that incentive programs determine how well the goals of the public and private sectors are in sync with urban resilience. Incentives are capable of allocating resources, promoting innovation, and encouraging strategic planning [20,98]. Examples are performance-based contracting, PPPs, tax credits, innovation contests, and the inclusion of resilience indices into development permits. The opportunities for funding schemes and regulatory sandboxes under Singapore’s Smart Nation program show how incentives encourage smart technology for resilience [55].

Some difficulties of designing incentives are the side effects and short term/long term problems, hence the need for thorough policymaking and examination. Difficulties include the fast pace of ICT innovations and problems related to the policy-making that address several city-based systems by necessity requiring flexibility and multilateral formats. Mechanisms and regulations are very crucial in promoting the integration of resilience into smart city initiatives. Such frameworks must consider the possibilities of creating novelties whilst ensuring that people are protected from risks [55]. These are standards required in resilient infrastructure, data management, certification and accreditation, and emergent building codes. The EU regulations present common standards, indicative of emerging regulations and strategies in developing smart cities [104].

Training and capacity building of city planners and stakeholders regarding the urban resilience plans and guidelines are the key enablers in this regard. Practical skills and adequate knowledge can allow the actors to create proper strategies of resilience in the context of the growing complexity of urban challenges [34]. Variances of capacity building can be seen in workshops, training programs, and other learning events shared in a format that addresses resilience planning, risk assessment, and community engagement.

These strategies can help improve the competencies of city developers and others to accommodate practical measures that respond to future risks such as climate change and disasters [105]. Education has a great impact on creating resilience in different societies. Cities can reach out and make the citizenry aware of the importance of resilience and the existing resources to actively participate in resilience planning and practice [106]. Such programs may engage schools, faith- and community-based organizations, and local government agencies, thereby promoting knowledge-sharing and capacity development [107].

The results show that cities with a developed and improved technological environment, using real-time data and digital health management solutions, were more resistant during the COVID-19 pandemic. These cities also supervised health care systems, boosted resource utilization, and provided distant services [108]. Apps such as contact tracing, intelligent wellbeing solutions, and delivery solutions were critical to ensuring urban operations during the lockdown. However, smart cities with weak technological platforms failed to handle the crisis effectively, proving that a city’s resilience is not a function of technology but also of technological democracy and flexibility of the urban systems [109].

4. Discussion

This paper has reviewed the literature on smart city processes and urban resilience, showing that enhanced resilience requires technology, community involvement, and sound policies. In the 70 reviewed literature, smart cities are seen to use ICT to enhance urban management and service delivery. This is critical in tackling current urban issues such as climate change through the management of limited resources and population increase [30]. A contextual analysis of these papers implies that although the promising roles of smart technologies to support urban resilience are clear, the success of these measures depends more on such national and local conditions as economics, government, and people’s participation [98]. For instance, the implementation of smart city projects in cities that sought leaders’ actions and support from the members of the public yielded better results [29]. This is in line with the conceptualization of “urban resilience” as not just a technical problem but as a sociopolitical issue that requires the integration of multiple aspects of urban existence [3].

Emergency management is a central component of urban resilience, including the ability of cities to prevent, manage, and recover from emergency events, including natural disasters, infrastructure breakdown, and pandemics, which are some of the threats to the stability and functionality of urban centers [74]. An emergency management strategy incorporating a resilience perspective is appropriate in reducing socio-economic losses while maintaining critical functions [110].

Using technology, smart cities possess the ability to transform emergency management. IoT devices, for example, act as early indicators of possible disruptions as they track and analyze behavioral patterns [83]. Smart sensors installed in cities constantly monitor different variables, including water levels in floods, building motions during earthquakes, and air quality in fire events [68]. Such data creates a basis for applying machine learning algorithms for risk prediction and developing prevention strategies.

In emergencies, smart technologies contribute to distributing resources and land and quickly disseminating information. Centralized control systems, such as the control panels, enable urban managers to monitor and evaluate respondents across multiple departments, hence developing an integrated approach [70]. For instance, the systems used to manage traffic can be adjusted to form corridors to move people out of harm’s way or grant free access to emergency vehicles [75]. Authorities in charge can provide important information through mobile applications and social networks so that affected populations can evacuate instantly and obtain the necessary support resources [92].

Disaster management for urban resilience is not only a technological issue. It can only be completed through suitable governance structures, cross-agency coordination, cooperation, and championing community engagement [75]. Public authorities within cities are often fragmented, with separate departments and agencies not easily able to coordinate [68]. The application of emergency management within the broader resilience paradigm requires overcoming such silos, as well as cooperation between departments [70]. Joint command posts and compatible communication equipment are shown to improve coordination.

Equity is another critical dimension of emergency management. Resilience initiatives often fail to handle the specific threats of minority groups. For instance, they lack basic alert systems or evacuation necessities [73]. Smart city initiatives should aim at the availability and effectiveness of everyone, with a special focus on improving the quality of life of vulnerable people. Translating emergency alert messages and providing facilities for the physically challenged will help address the needs of all communities and populations [1]. Other factors of smart city-based emergency management include cybersecurity and data privacy. Since urban areas depend on complex systems to support their operations, they are vulnerable to cyber risks that may affect emergency services. It is, therefore, essential to follow strong cybersecurity principles such as system audits and encryption to safeguard and regain public confidence [70].

Hence, resilience-based emergency management must be viewed from a long term standpoint. The first is the process of taking lessons that have been gathered and applying them to future planning and developing systems that are dynamic and adjust themselves to new risk advancements [71]. Disaster risk reduction by ensuring that proper infrastructure is put in place while at the same time creating awareness and drilling on how to handle disasters is a priority for smart cities [74]. Applying models and other awareness-creating campaigns and practicing mock drills can prepare everyone for an emergency, thus improving the overall response capability [72].

The findings show that the connection between smart city development and resilience is not straightforward. In some cities, whereas technological developments contributed significantly to their responses, others relied on less sophisticated approaches [111]. The pandemic of COVID-19 further brought awareness that resilience is not only about technology infrastructure; adaptability, social, and diverse systems also matter [112,113,114]. Smart cities, because of their inclusive and modular public space designs, were in a better position to address the crisis despite technology. Smart cities, especially those in the developing world, learned through the pandemic that the digital ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ only exacerbated inequalities [100]. Also, the crisis revealed the need to assimilate sustainable development and public health into smart city strategies [115]. Thus, future smart cities must be designed based on the lesson learned from the pandemic: flexibility, sustainability, and equity of the systems that enable them.

The research analysis of other countries points to the fact that the definition of smart cities is quite diverse depending on the region and context. For instance, Hollands [46] rejects the given principle of the “smart city” branding that, in his opinion, executes the broader socioeconomic and governance disputes. Along the same line of thought, Allam and Newman [21] emphasize that the smart city concept often neglects culture and history in favor of a technological approach to urban resilience. By way of contrast, the present research highlights the importance of a new theoretical framework that will address the technological, social, and environmental aspects of urban resilience. More specifically, Bibri and Krogstie [6] suggest an extensive framework that uses IoT and big data analytics as the main pillars for developing smart city strategies. This model gives importance to using and managing data to improve urban resilience [116].

Further analysis of the literature shows it is also possible to define that the correlation between sustainability and smart city concepts is essential for the development of long term sustainability. Weaver [82] posits on the sustainability aspect within smart city processes remarks on the aspect of environmental sensibility within smart city processes. This view tallies with the evidence emerging from the literature that supports sustainability as one of the foundational values of urban resilience [81].

Smart city planning has risen to the occasion when it comes to addressing challenges that are common with urban development, climate change, and scarcity of resources that are evident in cities globally. Exploiting ICT, smart city projects focus on increasing the efficiency of urban planning and delivering public services with a view to enhancing the quality of life, sustainability, and resilience of cities [30,117]. However, these strategies might not work as expected due to the extant local context factors such as economic status, administrative frameworks, and stakeholders’ participation [98].

Public participation is one of the vital aspects in developing and launching smart city concepts. The use of participatory management systems will enhance the effectiveness and legitimacy of the resilience strategies [29]. One of the policy recommendations that has been proposed in this area is the need to engage and include all stakeholders, especially less privileged people, by incorporating methods that can effectively accommodate them in public participation processes [21].

Moreover, social networks, websites, mobile apps, and other digital tools can enable active communication, citizen engagement, and feedback [118]. As smart city systems use big data, sensors, social networks, and mobile applications, controlling and processing data to achieve proper and swift responses from urban management systems is important [116,119,120]. It is crucial to develop sound frameworks for collecting, accumulating, and analyzing urban data, which calls for inward investment [6,121]. Another activity is to establish rules regarding privacy, protection, and ethical utilization of data in any organization. Sharing of data and the integration of the different city departments and external partners can also improve use of the data collected [22].

Similarly, data will be useful if transformed with the help of data visualization and analytics into meaningful insights that can be used by urban planners and decision-makers [114,116]. Facing the complex issues of urban resilience calls for multidisciplinary and/or cross-sectoral partnerships that can involve governmental organizations, private firms and businesses, universities, and other community-based organizations [118,122,123]. To encourage this collaboration, more structural links and effective collaboration within the city departments, such as joint planning committees and cross-functional teams, should be developed [98]. The private sector can be a source of technology, capital, and technological brains [46]. Partnerships with academic institutions help to establish research, test new approaches, and share technical expertise [28,124,125]. Furthermore, the engagement of civil society organizations in resilience planning and implementation, especially in the areas of community mobilization and capacity development, is helpful [29,126,127].

Sustainability principles must therefore form part of the overall planning of smart cities to increase their sustainability. It is about the sustainability of resources, which involves energy use, efficient environmental management, and mitigating their impacts on the natural environment [82,128]. Guidelines for sustainability and an index for benchmarking should be set for creating smart city projects and measuring their environmental consequences [30]. Another important measure has been the use of renewable power sources and effective energy-intensive facilities, infrastructure, and buildings [81]. Urban environmental solutions, including green structures such as urban forests, green roofs, and permeable surfaces, should be encouraged to improve ecosystems and reduce the impacts of climate change [21,129,130,131]. The approaches of the circular economy, such as recycling of waste, recovery of resources, and the symbiosis of industries, can reduce waste and properly utilize resources [23].

There is a need to foster the development of an environment that supports innovation and the scaling up of smart city solutions [132,133,134]. Governmental agencies should embrace R&D, partnership with software vendors, and provision of learning opportunities [6,135]. Creating innovative places, living laboratories, and test beds that may support the development of new smart city technologies and business models is recommended [28,136,137,138]. Investment stimulation, including grants, tax credits, and PPPs, is a way to drive smart city ideas and their implementation [22]. A crucial strategy is to adapt the existing legislation to permit and embrace smart elements in developing urban environments without compromising security, safety, and fair means [139,140,141]. It is suggested that urban managers invest in smart city capacity and training for city officials, urban planners, and the community to ensure that they are adequately ready for smart city implementation and management.

5. Conclusions

There are several factors to consider in planning and developing smart and resilient cities, especially in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review addressed the research question: can cities gain more resilience while pursuing smart city planning by reviewing the bodies of literature on smart city planning and urban resilience? The study identified key components, barriers, and enablers in integrating resilience outcomes within smart city development. The findings indicate that although there are challenges of integrating smart city technology with urban resilience, cities engaged in smart city planning are likely to experience increased resilience. Resilient cities of the future must have effective predictive and real-time assessments and cost-effective emergency management systems. Sophisticated technologies combined with socioeconomic policies such as equity, environmental sustainability, governance, and public participation are more effective in enhancing resiliency. The complex issues of urbanization, climate change, and resource management require an all-encompassing strategy that integrates technology, sustainability, and resilience.

In summary, there are many benefits and obstacles associated with the combination of smart city development and urban resilience. Cities need to use a multidisciplinary strategy that incorporates socioeconomic, technological, and environmental factors. To effectively improve urban resilience and build sustainable futures, smart cities must prioritize inclusiveness, cooperation, and careful planning. This paper enhances understanding in academic and policy spheres regarding the need for improved design and implementation of smart and resilient city concepts. It further encourages planners to adopt a forward-thinking approach that incorporates resilience into urban policymaking, fostering the development of cities that are not only smart but also more resilient.

As such, this study provides a foundation for future research and critical discussions on how smart city development can enhance resilience and promote more sustainable, adaptive urban practices. Limitations in the amounts of information and the short cycle of technology development that occur in the field can be considered as pitfalls in increasing the depth and currency of the information. Moreover, the adoption of a technological approach may mask essential sociocultural and political contexts that will determine the success of smart city strategies. In the field of smart cities, longitudinal studies could help understand the effects of smart technologies and strategies on related urban sectors. In addition, sociocultural and political insights into the study of smart cities will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the shifts and impacts of smart city processes on urban evolution. Assessing the potential for smart cities to increase urban resilience during pandemics such as COVID-19 is also crucial. Cities should depend on inclusive, adaptive, and sustainable systems that are the foundation of their resilience. Incorporating these issues into smart cities will make them in a better position to handle future challenges.